Tahsildar empowered to fix boundary within, outside municipal limits: HC

The High Court has said that a tahsildar is vested with powers under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act to determine the boundary of a survey number or a holding, irrespective of the fact whether the land is within the municipal or outside the municipal limits.

A division bench headed by Justice Alok Aradhe noted this while setting aside the order of the single judge bench that the tahsildar had no jurisdiction to fix the boundaries in respect of land within the municipal corporation limits.

The land in question is one acre and four guntas situated in Bengaluru East taluk.

A leading software firm had challenged the order of the tahsildar that he had jurisdiction to decide the dispute relating to fixing the boundary of the area which falls in BBMP limits.

The single-judge bench had quashed the tahsildar’s order of October 1, 2020, holding that since the property is within the Bengaluru city, under section 112-D of Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act (KMC) Act, the commissioner of the local municipal body is vested with the power to determine the boundary.

The appeal was filed by the owner of the land in question, challenging the order of the single judge bench.

The division bench said expressions such as ‘holding’ and ‘survey number’ used in section 2 (12) and 2 (32) of the KLR Act have to be read with section 140 of the KLR Act, which provides for determination of boundaries of land.

“Section 140 (2) of the Act provides that if any dispute arises concerning the boundary of survey number or a sub division of a survey number or a holding, the tahsildar shall decide the dispute having due regard to the land records. Thus, it is evident that the tahsildar under section 140 (2) of the Act has power to determine the boundary of a survey number or a holding. The aforesaid power can be exercised in respect of a survey number or a holding irrespective of the fact whether the same is situated within the municipal limits or outside the municipal limits,” the bench said.